4 ms·

The difference from Doorkee, or any matchmaking service, is that they do not guarantee to pay your rent for six months if a) they can't find someone within a mo

by e1g 5y ago

The difference from Doorkee, or any matchmaking service, is that they do not guarantee to pay your rent for six months if a) they can't find someone within a month or b) your landlord doesn't like them. This bet is highly asymmetric - they can win 1 month fee (if you sublease tomorrow) but lose 6x that. I'm also in NYC, and wouldn't underwrite this gamble two years ago, and absolutely not today.

crazygringo 5y ago
It doesn't seem that crazy to me. They say: > We were able to prove that we could make the financials work so long as we were able to fill the apartment within around 45 days of taking it over. They're prescreening apartments/leases so they're not going to take on an apartment they can't turn around in a month. And honestly, modeling NYC rental supply and demand according to a number of factors (neighborhood, price, condition, amenities, etc.) is pretty straightforward. It's a relatively liquid market. And like I said, landlords generally have explicit rules about tenant qualifications. They're not going to reject tenants on a whim. Why would they ever say no to a qualified tenant? That's like McDonald's refusing to sell you a quarter pounder. There's nothing about this that seems obviously unsustainable at all.
- danenania 5y ago
  "Why would they ever say no to a qualified tenant?" I agree with the rest of your comment, but in my experience landlords in hot markets can be pretty capricious. If they know they'll have a steady stream of applicants, many will definitely reject qualified tenants based on personal whims or to hold out for someone they see as "more" qualified or more likely to stay long term. That said, as long as the apartment still gets turned around quickly then it's not really a threat to this business model.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - CydeWeys 5y ago
    That's not rejecting (all) qualified tenants though so much as they are merely using some kind of algorithm to pick one of the many prospective qualified tenants. They can only choose one anyway, and FIFO is not necessarily the best strategy. So a better way to phrase the question would be "Why would they ever say no to all qualified prospective tenants?"
    - unishark 5y ago
      In California my understanding is they are required to accept the first qualified tenant due to anti-discrimination laws. I thought NY was similar in that regard (and hence the income=3*rent or whatever the popular advertised rules are there).
      - crazygringo 5y ago
        That's been my experience as well, in practice (I don't if there's a legal reason). Yes they'll sometimes pick the most qualified applicant, but only if you submit your application the same day or same weekend, which is often the case with open houses. It really depends on the landlord however -- for a lot, it's literally the first qualified person to apply, which is why you want to be the first person to the open house and have all your documents ready to apply on the spot, since it might be gone 30 minutes later.
gbronner 5y ago
As a small ll I absolutely do not want this in my building. I negotiate lease break fees into my leases; if a tenant is unhappy, I'd rather charge them an appropriate amount rather than have them hire a broker whose sole goal is to find a tenant that can pay the first month of rent

by e1g 5y ago

crazygringo 5y ago

It doesn't seem that crazy to me. They say: > We were able to prove that we could make the financials work so long as we were able to fill the apartment within around 45 days of taking it over. They're prescreening apartments/leases so they're not going to take on an apartment they can't turn around in a month. And honestly, modeling NYC rental supply and demand according to a number of factors (neighborhood, price, condition, amenities, etc.) is pretty straightforward. It's a relatively liquid market. And like I said, landlords generally have explicit rules about tenant qualifications. They're not going to reject tenants on a whim. Why would they ever say no to a qualified tenant? That's like McDonald's refusing to sell you a quarter pounder. There's nothing about this that seems obviously unsustainable at all.

danenania 5y ago
"Why would they ever say no to a qualified tenant?" I agree with the rest of your comment, but in my experience landlords in hot markets can be pretty capricious. If they know they'll have a steady stream of applicants, many will definitely reject qualified tenants based on personal whims or to hold out for someone they see as "more" qualified or more likely to stay long term. That said, as long as the apartment still gets turned around quickly then it's not really a threat to this business model.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- CydeWeys 5y ago
  That's not rejecting (all) qualified tenants though so much as they are merely using some kind of algorithm to pick one of the many prospective qualified tenants. They can only choose one anyway, and FIFO is not necessarily the best strategy. So a better way to phrase the question would be "Why would they ever say no to all qualified prospective tenants?"
  - unishark 5y ago
    In California my understanding is they are required to accept the first qualified tenant due to anti-discrimination laws. I thought NY was similar in that regard (and hence the income=3*rent or whatever the popular advertised rules are there).
    - crazygringo 5y ago
      That's been my experience as well, in practice (I don't if there's a legal reason). Yes they'll sometimes pick the most qualified applicant, but only if you submit your application the same day or same weekend, which is often the case with open houses. It really depends on the landlord however -- for a lot, it's literally the first qualified person to apply, which is why you want to be the first person to the open house and have all your documents ready to apply on the spot, since it might be gone 30 minutes later.

gbronner 5y ago

As a small ll I absolutely do not want this in my building. I negotiate lease break fees into my leases; if a tenant is unhappy, I'd rather charge them an appropriate amount rather than have them hire a broker whose sole goal is to find a tenant that can pay the first month of rent